Duck Dynasty Star Banned Indefinitely for Anti-Gay Comments

[freak180]

That's not how proof works, and you know it.

 

The ones making the POSITIVE claims are the ones who must provide proof if they want anyone to believe them.

Oh no I'm sorry it works both ways. If he is going to dismiss it without evidence to support his claim then has no reason to attack it.

[mudslag]

Oh no I'm sorry it works both ways. If he is going to dismiss it without evidence to support his claim then has no reason to attack it.

 

 

But FloatingFatMan is right, I simply countered someone else's claim, a unfounded claim at that. Simply stating another religion shouldn't be seen as serious because an idol is a fat man is doing exactly what you accuse me of doing. Im not making claims that something exists based on some book. I simply dismissed that using said book as proof is an illogical form of claiming proof. The proof is on those making that claim, not the other way around saying prove it wrong. Like I said, you don't even grasp what circular logic is and how much of a fallacy it is. You honestly need to better educate yourself on what exactly that means. 

[FloatingFatMan]

The proof is on those making that claim, not the other way around saying prove it wrong. Like I said, you don't even grasp what circular logic is and how much of a fallacy it is. You honestly need to better educate yourself on what exactly that means. 

 

Alas, for many people, it seems that education and religion are incompatible with each other.  :/

[mudslag]

 

I find it all too funny that people look to books written by people for answers. Mankind is flawed. We are liars and motivated by greed. Why look to them as a reliable source? Our brain, emotions, and view on the world is more than enough to debunk this pitiful country we call "land of the free

 

 

Now this I find ironic, your very own status update on your profile page has this. Now freak just replace the last part of your statement with religion and then you know exactly where the rest of us are coming from.

[freak180]

But FloatingFatMan is right, I simply countered someone else's claim, a unfounded claim at that. Simply stating another religion shouldn't be seen as serious because an idol is a fat man is doing exactly what you accuse me of doing. Im not making claims that something exists based on some book. I simply dismissed that using said book as proof is an illogical form of claiming proof. The proof is on those making that claim, not the other way around saying prove it wrong. Like I said, you don't even grasp what circular logic is and how much of a fallacy it is. You honestly need to better educate yourself on what exactly that means. 

Countered with what? Unless it was removed because I didnt see s***

[mudslag]

Countered with what? Unless it was removed because I didnt see s***

 

 

You didnt look hard enough

 

 

they say that, but its not. Most of those are all created stories or god made by hand. It says do not worship anything made by human or earlthy things. For example buddhists. They created a fat guy and called him a god. Who could take that seriously?

 

[freak180]

 

 

 

 

Now this I find ironic, your very own status update on your profile page has this. Now freak just replace the last part of your statement with religion and then you know exactly where the rest of us are coming from.

 

First of all why are you on my profile and trying to use that towards this conversation. What I do on social networking is between friends and family and we simply have discussions on there. I simply dont insult other people's beliefs in any form. If you dont believe. Good for you, But dont try to make a joke about it is all I'm trying to say

[Skiver Veteran]

Is it just me or are you disagreeing with each other but actually in a round about way agreeing?

?

I am either completely missing the point (again!) but you both seem to be saying that just because a book says something doesn't make it right, and that each persons religion claims to be the one to claim it is correct. You both seem to be agreeing that without any form of proof that his is or is not the correct one other than what a book says is an incomplete argument.

[mudslag]

First of all why are you on my profile and trying to use that towards this conversation. What I do on social networking is between friends and family and we simply have discussions on there.

 

 

Hover your mouse cursor over your name, it pops right up. If you have a problem with others viewing your profile, then again you prob should stay off a public forum. 

 

 

 

 I simply dont insult other people's beliefs in any form. If you dont believe. Good for you, But dont try to make a joke about it is all I'm trying to say

 

You really have a hard time grasping even basic concepts here. And I wasn't making a joke, I do find it ironic you said what you said and at the same time try to defend something as illogical as circular reasoning. 

 

Such an ignorant man. If you cant provide information/ data on how it is false please shut up.

 

[freak180]

Hover your mouse cursor over your name, it pops right up. If you have a problem with others viewing your profile, then again you prob should stay off a public forum. 

 

 

 

 

You really have a hard time grasping even basic concepts here. And I wasn't making a joke, I do find it ironic you said what you said and at the same time try to defend something as illogical as circular reasoning. 

 

again you had no reason to view it..obviously asking for trouble. And yes you were so of course you wouldnt take other people's beliefs into consideration. If your gona say something bad about it at least back it up. This really got off topic and needs to be closed or post removed.

[FloatingFatMan]

For example buddhists. They created a fat guy and called him a god. Who could take that seriously?

 

Just to backtrack a little bit, I want to clarify something.

 

Guatama Bhudda was actually a real life, honest to goodness, person born in the Shakaya Republic in the Himalayan foothills sometime between 563 BC and 483 BC.  He wasn't a god or ever claimed to be a god and Bhuddists don't treat him as a god either. He was an "awakened" or  "enlightened" teacher who shared his insights to help others to end their suffering through the elimination of ignorance via spiritual/pure means.

 

No one created a "fat man" and called him a god. That you believe so just proves your ignorance of other faiths.

[trag3dy]

Isn't there another thread where you guys can talk about religion? Or did I click on the wrong link?

[Skiver Veteran]

I think both Trag3dy and freak180 have made a good point in that the thread is going way off topic now, if you guys want to continue this head over to here.

 

I won't remove any posts, although irrelvant it started off on topic and evolved.

[guru]

they say that, but its not. Most of those are all created stories or god made by hand. It says do not worship anything made by human or earlthy things. For example buddhists. They created a fat guy and called him a god. Who could take that seriously?

lol. buddhism doesnt have the god concept .

[Buttus]

I think both Trag3dy and freak180 have made a good point in that the thread is going way off topic now, if you guys want to continue this head over to here.

 

I won't remove any posts, although irrelvant it started off on topic and evolved.

 

i'm just surprised the drunkards, slanderers and the rest of the groups mentioned aren't complaining!

[KingCracker]

I think he should be allowed on the show, plenty of people made anti gay comments, jo rogan was one person he's still on television. Plus if they didn't want to know what an old man thought of homosexuals they shouldn't have asked. I mean what do you think a 68 year old backwoods elderly man is gonna say?? Plus he didn't say you shouldn't be gay, to him he thought that a vagina was more desirable than a mans anus and I can assure you that millions of straight men agree.

[HawkMan]

they say that, but its not. Most of those are all created stories or god made by hand. It says do not worship anything made by human or earlthy things. For example buddhists. They created a fat guy and called him a god. Who could take that seriously?

You know if you're going to call other people and people believing in other religion ignorant. Maybe you should read up on those religions before you criticize them and sound ignorant yourself ?

[Kreuger]

I wouldnt call people worth millions hobos

 

They wouldn't be worth millions if the brain dead society stopped effing watching garbage tv.

[Skiver Veteran]

They wouldn't be worth millions if the brain dead society stopped effing watching garbage tv.

I don't know much about the show, but from what I have read, they were pretty well off before someone decided to make a TV series about their life.

[trag3dy]

They wouldn't be worth millions if the brain dead society stopped effing watching garbage tv.

 

Helps to know a little about  the subject before making comments like this. Their business made them millions and because of that and their family is why they got the show.

 

Despite what you may think the show is quite family friendly and my cousins young kids love it. I'm sure some one out there thinks something you enjoy is garbage, also. There is always the other side of the coin.

[benthebear]

Even after it's been pointed out in this thread, as well as past others on this forum, people still have no clue what the freedom of speech truly means. 

 

It's only a freedom of speech issue because Sarah Palin has a new book out. As do some of the Robertsons.

 

Edit: Oh, and she has a new show coming out too.

[Noir Angel]

I think he should be allowed on the show, plenty of people made anti gay comments, jo rogan was one person he's still on television. Plus if they didn't want to know what an old man thought of homosexuals they shouldn't have asked. I mean what do you think a 68 year old backwoods elderly man is gonna say?? Plus he didn't say you shouldn't be gay, to him he thought that a vagina was more desirable than a mans anus and I can assure you that millions of straight men agree.

 

Interesting how your position seems to have completely backflipped since the discussion about the Piers Morgan show. You were only too eager to have him booted off TV.

[techbeck]

This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. No one is saying he cannot say what his beliefs are. A&E just does not agree with what he said and are bending to the pressure from gays/lesbians. Which is stupid. Gays and lesbians want tolerance towards their beliefs and what they say, but yet do not practice the same thing. As far as the comment on black people...well, so? Maybe he really didnt see what they had to go through or was just ignorant about it.

Anyway, this show will be dead. I will be surprised if it is renewed after next season. IF so, will be canceled within a year. A&E will have to do lots to get Phil out of the show. And what about the end of each show where they sit around at the table as a family? Also, will A&E still play reruns of the episodes Phil is in?

People are getting more and more offended about what people say. The word is becoming tolerant in certain ways, but in a lot of other ways less tolerant. You have to watch what you say, do, watch, listen to...it is getting ridiculous. God forbid we offend someone rather than acting human. People need to stop reacting all the time and stop to think if what happened is something to make a big deal about. Use common sense.

[KingCracker]

Interesting how your position seems to have completely backflipped since the discussion about the Piers Morgan show. You were only too eager to have him booted off TV.

The difference is piers morgan said he would deport himself if gun laws didn't change and the fact every show he did was about gun control. This guy is asked his opinion once.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

Interesting how your position seems to have completely backflipped since the discussion about the Piers Morgan show. You were only too eager to have him booted off TV.

 

I hate to say it, but that's basically a logical fallacy (false comparison and Tu quoque)... The Piers Morgan thing wasn't the same thing and even if he was being hypocritical, so what?